Re: question about readonly instances - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Szymon Guz
Subject Re: question about readonly instances
Date
Msg-id BANLkTi=N6rGocexLTFpApXp+poxjYKuMZQ@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: question about readonly instances  (Ireneusz Pluta <ipluta@wp.pl>)
Responses Re: question about readonly instances  (Terry Schmitt <terry.schmitt@gmail.com>)
Re: question about readonly instances  (Craig Ringer <craig@postnewspapers.com.au>)
Re: question about readonly instances  ("Albe Laurenz" <laurenz.albe@wien.gv.at>)
List pgsql-general


On 18 May 2011 22:22, Ireneusz Pluta <ipluta@wp.pl> wrote:
W dniu 2011-05-18 13:21, Szymon Guz pisze:

Hi,
I've got a question about quite a strange configuration.
I was asked if we can have one storage, with one data directory where one postgresql instance writes data, and many other instances read those.
Is that possible without any replication and copying data?

Why do they think they need that?

They've got some quite nice and huge storage and it would be nice to use it from many different machines running postgreses.
Another option is Oracle which can do that. Replicating data to another directory is not an option, not for this amount of data and the way of loading/using data they need.
I've always done that using replication to different machines and running there Postgres on each, I've never heard of this kind of using Postgres. That's why I think this is "strange".

regards
Szymon

pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: Ireneusz Pluta
Date:
Subject: Re: question about readonly instances
Next
From: Bret Stern
Date:
Subject: Using libpq with Visual Studio 2008